Pot Odds vs. Implied Odds

[VVVVVV]

I posted this in the Beginner's forum, but would also like to help from this group.
Confused on how to use odds. Let's say I flopped the nut flush draw, giving me 9 outs and 4:1 odds against. My opponent has $12 stack and I have him covered. He bets $2 into a $2 pot. Do I use the pot odds $4 pot, $2 to call, 2:1 or do I use $4 pot plus $10 stack behind, 7:1 to make my decision?
What I have been doing is looking at how much my opponent has already committed to the pot. If he has committed less than 1/3 third of his stack, I'll look at the present pot odds. If he has already committed more than 1/3 of his stack, I'll look at his stack size, figuring he is likely to play for the entire stack. Does this logic make sense?

[munkey]

O.k. first let me say this is a huge topic - I'll try and
mention a few things but if you're lucky Pokey will magically appear and give the defiitive treatise [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

In general in NL implied odds (or the lack of -but that's another thread) are what matter more in NL. Pot odds are mainly for river decions vs equity of villan's likely range or flop AI combo draw scenarios -either the one with it or with the made hand/overpair.


I'll use kind of your example, NL10 10$ 100bb stacks.

Depending on the flop texture and what you think villan holds when he leads 2$/4$ on the flop we are getting 4:2 or 2to 1 pot odds as you say yet we have 9 clear outs
~18% equity to hit on the next card so calling would appear to be wrong - but villan is likely to bet the turn again or if turn checked through the river -lets say 1/2 pot conservatively so you stand to win another 3$ so your implied odds could be judged to be 7:2 or 3.5 to 1 so if we can see the turn and river card it's +EV.

Although implied odds are mostly a function of stack sizes they are affected by how deceptive our hand is -flushes are obvious when they hit and to thinking opponents we will get paid less which is one reason why we bet/raise our draws.

Also OOP it's harder to extract because we act first and don;t have the option of the last biggest bet.

The 1/3 stack you mention is considered a key commitment threshold -where in general villan shouldn't continue putting more money with the intention to fold as he's making a big mistake -it's a fucntion on pot/odds vs equity of his hand vs likely range of villan -but I wouldn't be looking @ pot odds then -it's too late I'd made my read on his range given board and decided whether I was ARRRRIng or folding.

Get Professional No-Limit (PNL) (if you haven't already) - there's lots more abut commitment thresholds/SPR e.t.c in there.

You seem to have touched on some of the key ideas of NL but applying them is what matters - I struggled to come up with a fake example above -there's just too many factors to consider in playing a draw -but in general look @ implied odds in NL.

Hope this has helped somewhat, others will probably be clearer [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[VVVVVV]

Hi Munkey:
Thanks for writing back. I've read PNL (my head feels like my avatar) and am trying to figure this out. It seems like identifying when an opponent commits 1/3 of his stack is a critical point. Either they are committed to their whole stack or are making a big mistake by folding after putting this much into the pot.
I just started using Poker Office. They do not have a way of tracking when opponents reach the 1/3 stack size. This seems like an important thing to know. Does Poker Tracker allow you to customize and alert you to this number? Or do you just recalculate in your head? Thanks

[Matt Flynn]

VVVV,

the point made in commitment threshold is that it's expensive to put a third of your stack in and then fold. sometimes you have to, especially against tough opponents. but weak players do it all the time b/c they don't think ahead. when you can avoid it, you usually should.